Bengali drama and theatre

2004·3.4 MB·English

by  Mukerjii, Amar

Bengali Drama and Theatre
AMAR MUKERJEE
","lJhile it is di:ficult.today to fix.the.dates of the earliest Bengali plays. or to state
VVwhethertheirongmlayinfertilityruesorShaivitentualsoreventheSanskritdrama.
itis generally accepted that the oldestextantform oftheatre in Bengal isthe Jatra.Most
probably,theveryearlyJatraswereconnectedwithvariousrites-whattheywere.nobody
cantellprecisely.Butitisalmostcertainthattheyhadmusic,recitativearia,thequalityof
'suddenness' anddeclamatoryutterancescombinedinaperformancethatwasnotamere
chant,noramerenarrationofastory,norevenmerelyricaleffusion.Theenactednarrative
containedstagesofcrisisasinotherdrama.Theperformancetookplaceinasquarearena
surrounded by theaudienceonthreesides,with no stage,scenery, orcurtain.
Right fromtheGitagovindamandSrikrishnaKirtantoBharatchandraandVidyasundar.
theJatrahasnotonlyrespondedtothedemandsofeveryage,movingfromareligioustoa
secularcontent. but has incorporated stories withbetter suspense, andhas assumed a
didactic, melodramatictone. This is evidentfromthe greaterdramaticactionandmore
pointed dialogue that characterizesomeof thelater specimensoftheancientform.1tre
quiredaforeignforceto throwthisthrivingtheatreoverboard.Adegeneratesetofpracti
tionersandanewsenseofvalueshavesealeditsfateforever.
ThemodernBengalidramabeganwiththeimpactoftheWestandtheformationofanew
gentry.TheopeningofatheatreinCalcuttabyaEuropeanin1795andtheperformanceof
two Bengali playstranslated from Englishin 1795-96 expedited theprocessofbuildinga
new Bengalistage. After aperiodof translations and adaptations. ontheonehand. and
effortstogo back tothe old style.onthe other,Michael MadhusudanDuttcarne upwitha
number of plays thatbroke newground notonly intheme butinform and technique.
Taracharan inhisBhadrarjun gave usthe firstdramaontheEnglishmodel withsomesort
ofplotand discourse. Jogendranath Gupta's Kirtivllas,if more decisively influencedby
the Western method. could hardlycatch thespiritofEuropeandrama,whileHarachandra
was.inhisprefacetoBhanumatiChiuavilas.moreanxioustoemploythenew-foundmelhod
inanIndian story.combiningthetechnicaladvantagesoftheformer withthedogmatic
implicationsofthelatter.NatukeRarnnarayan,inspiteofhisratheracuterealism,tookwhat
Madhushudan would have called a retrograde step, though Rarnnarayan's integration of
socialthemesin hisplayslaidthe foundationoftheBengalidomesticdramaandtheprob
lemplay.
With Madhushudan Durt, Bengalidrama went forward as much as Elizabethan drama
had with Marlowe.There was a 'foreignair' about Madhusudan'sdramaand thatairblew
away not only the older form but older ideas as well.His ideal was that ofthe romantic
drama; he was attracted by its passion. vigour, and intensity.To him. tragedy meant the
SangUINatal Vol.XXXVIII.No.2.2004
58 A~IAR ~tUKERJEE
struggle ofabravehumaasoulagainst forces which in theend overwhelmhim;dramahad
toshowthisinamannerthatdidnot seempredetermined,Ifhisstories werefrom Indian
sources,theyweresobecauseoftheneedsofthetheatreandhisownriotousimagination.
BUInothere3Smuchasindevelopmentofplot.delineationofcharacter.andmanipulation
oftensionandsuspenseonecanseethegreatnessofhisart. Thefactthathewroteallhis
plays forthe Belgatehia Natyashala gavehim aconcretesenseofthetheatre whichcan be
seen inhisdeft handlingofvariegated speech,songs,soliloquies and asides,in the fusion
ofthetragicand thecomic-s-evenhishandlingoftheunitieswhichhebroketo createan
overallunityofimpression.HebreathedlyricismintothehardnessofBengaliprose,giving
thelatteradramaticquality which distinguishesitfromAlalerGharer Dulal. One hasonly
10read Michael'sfarees10know Ihecontributionhe made 10Bengalidramaticprose.
The almost logical development of the new-found prose style can be discerned in
Dinabandhu's plays; an intense realism aad a deep humaaism are both the merits and
demerits ofhis work. Where hisrealismdegenerates intonaturalism,hisplays lose their
verve,andwherehishumanismtakes theformofpity,theydeteriorateintomelodrama,But
eventhere,hisacuteobservationofsocietycanexpressitselfinironywhenitiscombined
with detachment. His laughter does not always attainthe urbanityof a Moliere. BUIwhat
Dinabandhu lacks in humour, he makes up by his sympathy; his Nildarpan has lived by
this quality more thaa any other, In fact, it kept the Bengali stage alive, as did his two
subsequent"farces, whichexpressedhisresentment attheinroadsEuropean wayshad
madeintoBengali society.
The new Bengali theatre was by no meaas a public theatre,patronized as it was by the
elite,Tothe ordinary folkwas availablethe improvisedgninatyu, a sort ofmusical drama
thatcombinedthedevotionaland lyricalqualitiesoftheJatrawiththetheme,plot-structure
aad variety oftheEnglish-styledrama,Here, dramawenlout ofthe confinesoftheelite to
gain a shape later at the hands of many subsequent playwrights. This gitinatya empha
sized theidealisticinsteadofthereformistspiritoftheregulartheatre;italso reflected the
instabilityoftheageand thedesire insome to makeaprofitoutofthestage.A temporary
suspensionofstageplays had createdgroups advocating a fully professional theatre,and
protests were published in newspapers recommending the foundation of a public stage
where there would beregularshows towhich admission would be bytickets.
The National Theatre was the first public theatre to come into being in 1872. Once
Lilabati has been staged there, the fate of all dramatists was to be reckoned at the foot
lights. The repertoire of the National Theatre consisted of the better-known plays ofthe
timeandtheshowdayswerenowfixed.DinabandhuwasitsmaindramatisttillGirishGhosh
entered thefield,first withhisdramatizationofwell-knownnovels,and thenwith playsof
hisown.The firstphaseoftheNationalTheatre came toanendon8 March 1893;itwasto
two.
berevived later. butnot untiltheparentorganizationhadsplitinto
Meanwhile, two intrepid dramatists were exerting themselves in search of a suitable
form: ManmohanBasu,theauthorofRamabhishek, SariNarak, and Harishchandra, deal-
BENGALI DRAMA AND THEATRE S9
ingmostlywithpuranic themes; and JyotirindranathTagore ofAshrumatifame, whowas
seekingtofuseWesternrealismwithIndianidealism.Bynow,thespiritualawakeningthat
had overtaken Bengalhadbeguntocoincidewithnational awareness, and not onlyour
moral butoureconomicideaswereundergoing rapid transformation. Reformist zealcoa
lescedwithpatriotism,andasenseofthis-worldlinesstogetherwithsocialmobilitycreated
anempiricaloutlookthathaditseffectonourconceptionofgood,evil,fateandthesuper
natural. Inmanyways,thisgaverisetoideasoftragedyneverpossibleintheolderworld,
withitsconceptionofacycleoflivesprecedingandsucceedingthepresentone.Thenew
middle class,towhichthetheatre wasnowopen,startedresponding toaclash ofideals
made and marred byitself.and notentirely regulated byextraneous powers. Thesubse
quent Bengalidrama moreorlessvacillatedbetween theworld ofobjective thought and
subjectiveimpulse, betweentheindividual andsociety,asitwere.
Inmany ways.therefore, Manmohan's dramatic stylecould beconsidered retrograde,
thoughhisrealdesire was.toevolveamusicalformliketheoperathatwouldalsobegood
theatre. In this heamply succeededeven when hisideaofthetragichadnotclearlydefined
itselfand whenhisplayswavered between thedemands ofcausality and predestination.
Hisemphasis clearlywason characterization, andontheformation of alanguage that
wouldbeakintothemusicalgeniusoftheBengalipeople.Notthathisplotswerewellmade
orhischaracterizationperfect.buthisgodsandgoddesseswerehumanizedandimpelledto
actfromwithin.
ToJyotirindranath should perhaps go the credit of introducing a newform in Bengali
drama-the extravaganza-andofprovidinginspirationtooneofourgreatestdramatists,
RabindranathTagore. ToJyotirindranath should also go thecredit ofestablishing aunion
betweenrealismandfantasy andofrescuingBengalidramaticprosefromitsrusticityand
vulgarity.The beginningsofthepatriotic-romanticdramainBengalcouldwellbetracedto
Puruvikram, Ashrumati andSarojini, whosehighfervour and intense devotion tothe
patrioticcausewereenoughtowinfortheatrethesealofpublicapproval.Thetoneofthese
plays, as well as that ofJyotirindranath's latercomedies, was elevated; thelanguage had
restraint evenwhenthespeeches werelong-winded; and suspensewassohandled asnot
to make the plays altogethermelodramatic. Hisfarces, apparently modelledonMoliere's,
hadsomeofthat master'ssenseoffun. Jyotirindranath'shandlingofdramaticdevicesand
hisunderstandingofcharacterwereinnowayinferiortothoseofanycontemporarydrama
tist.Ifhehad only belongedtothe public stage,hewouldhaveleftadeeperimpressonthe
Bengali drama-toits advantage.
InGirishGhosh,Bengalidramafounditsgreatestsaviour.However,sincehehadfirstto
meettheneedsofthetheatreto whichheslowlygaveaconsolidated shape,hepanderedto
thetastesofthegalleriestosuchanextentthatinspiteofalltheingredientsofShakespearean
drama deftly integratedinto his technique, hisplays frequently sufferred interms oftheir
totaldesign. ThereishardlyanydramaticformofBengal thatGirishleftuntouchedand,in
away,unadorned.buttheemphasisthatheputonasingleidea.oracharacter.orascene-
60 AMARMUKERJEE
eitherduetotheexigenciesofthetheatreorforanimmediate,strikingeffect-s-didnotallow
anyoftheseformstoattaindramaticperfection.
ThisdoesnotmeanGirishdidnothaveacleardramatic perspectiveorwasnotresource
fulenoughinplanninghisscenes.HeneverJackedasuitablestoryandhad.atleastinhis
bhakti plays,arrivedat an integrated view oflife thatcontained elements oftragedy.The
flexibilityofhislanguagefarexceeded thesuppleness ofMichael'sandhislanguagewas,
in many ways,moredramaticthanTagore's.Heresponded alsoto the demandsoftheage
by seeinginHindurevivalismasource oftremendousindividualpower,thethwartingof
which could as well be a motifof tragedy. He was fully aware ofcontemporary social
problemslikethebreak-upofthejointfamily,thedowrysystem,polygamy,etc.,discerning
inthemsourcesofconflictthatcouldanddid breakhuman hearts.The religious dramahad
inhimastoutprotagonist.notbecausehetookreligionastheonlyfactoflife.butbecause
hesoughttoshowitssocialand individualmanifestations heading to aconflict.Conflict
hadalsocharacterizedhishistoricalplayslikeSirajuddoula.wherearomanticindividualis
setagainstforces ofhistoricaldisruption, muchlike whatfollowedthepartitionofBengal.
He was not unfaithful to history, but he often lent his historical personages unexpected
traitsoferrororguiltthathadcharacterized theGreekdrama.
In hissocial plays too, as in Praju/la,for instance, what appears to be sheer personal
idiosyncrasyisinfactaninherenttrailofcharacterwhichcomesintoconflictwithsociety.
Girisb didnotlackindiversity of incidents orin ability to create moments ofdramatic
tension;butevenwhentheseweremultipliedinnumbertothepointof beingmerelyepi
sodical,inAristotle'ssenseoftheterm,hisintentionwastodrivetheactionofthedrama
inwards, as he confessed when he wrote that "the best literary artconsists in showing
internalaction,onlymanifestationsofwhichcanbefeltoutside",
Here it was that Girish carried the Bengali drama several steps forward. This if
Madhushudan wastheMarloweofBengalidrama,Girish surely was itsShakespeare.For,
morethanMadhushudan,Girishcarriedtragedy[0an intellectual plane,makingitapartof
our innermostbeing. The endurance of Bilvamangal,theanxieties of Jogesh, the tribula
tionsofKarunarnaya,and thesufferingsofSirajuddoulawoulddo credittoanydramatist
concernedwith the values of life.It is true that sometimes these get lost in upsurges of
excessive emotion; buteven then,ithas to be admitted that ofall modern Bengaliplay
wrights, Girish alone could feel the full force of the passions oflife-passions whose
impactisgreatnotonlyonanindividualbutalsoonsociety.
Butunfortunately,suchgreatmoments are not many in Girish'splays.The demandsof
his audience andthe speed atwhich he improvised plays did not permithim to achievea
form inkeepingwithhisgenius,inspiteofhismasteryofthevariousingredientsofdrama.
However.ifhisplayssometimesdeterioratedintonarration.hecouldalsodepictaction;if
he sometimes assembledonlyaconglomerationof scenes, he had some remarl::ably well
knit plays too; and if his language became didactic and heavy,he could also lend it the
unmistakabledramaticvigour ofgairikchhanda. But when several oftheseshortcomings
BENGALI DRAMA AND THEATRE 61
combined, moments ofpassion andflashes ofprofound insight intohumanfeelings dis
solved into melodrama; events went out ofhand andgreatmoralproblems received only
didactic solutions.
Itwas apitythat Girishfell avictimtoDryden'sfamousdictum:
Thedrama'slawsthedrama'spatronsgive
Forwe thatlive toplease, mustplease tolive.
But for anybody who had to keep the theatregoing, there was no other alternative.
Girish Ghosh did whathe could for the stage firstly bygiving it apermanentshape; sec
ondly, by raising its public stature; thirdly, by making it self-supporting; and finally by
introducing astandard of showmanship whichhasnotyetbeenbasicallyreplaced atleast
inthepublictheatre. Asatheatremanager,Girish'scontributionwasinvaluable,foritwas
he who put actresses permanently on the stage andtrainedseveral dozens ofactorsand
actresses. Hisownstyleofacting,characterizedbyanextremefreedomofmovementand
elasticityof carriage, couldredeemotherwisedullpiecesofdrama, buthisabilities were
oftenusedtoattain onlyasentimental effect.
So greatwas Girish'simpacton the theatre of his timesthat hisstyleof acting and
dramaticcraftremainedinvogueforlong,influencingactorslikeDaniBabuanddramatists
likeRajkrishnaRoy,AmritlalBose,KshirodprasadVidyabinodeandevenD.L.Royinmany
diverseways.Rajkrishna,moreorlessGirish'scontemporary,tooktheJatraelementfrom
Girish'splays,reinforceditwith bhakti,andgavehisdramaamusical structure.Resultantly,
there wasmorenarrationthanactioninhisplays,andmoredivineinterference inhuman
affairs wasshownthaneverbefore.Hissenseofrealismwasoverwhelmedbytheplayof
celestialpowers.
AmritlalBose,alsoGirish'scontemporaryandanactor-dramatistlikehim,didnotattach
anyvaluetothe'modem'valuesoflife.Hisrecurrenttargetofattackwasthenew-fangled
ideaofmodernBengal.LikeGirishGhosh,hewrotevoluminouslyforastagewhichheonce
heldinhis grip. Withapparentease,he denouncedtheBrabmoSamaj, professionalpoliti
cians,temperanceworkers,anglicizedBengalis,andself-appointedleadersofsocialreform
inaseriesofplays which,inspiteof theirwitticisms, didnotalwaysrisetothehighest
levelsofcomedy.
Infact, itis difficulttocallhis playspure comedy-somuchsatirehehadintroducedin
them.His plots wereconstructed in thestyleofthecomedyof intrigue, buthisscenes
frequently overstepped the bounds of decencyand good taste. Itis true thatAmritlal had
aremarkableknackofobservingthe foibles ofsociety, buthis approach wastoo personal
tobeuniversal,andhisstandtooconservativetobesympathetic. Hecastigatedsocietyfor
itslapsesvigorously,diplayingabrillianceofdialogueandahardnessofstyle, butonlyon
rareoccasionscouldhedeftlyintegratetheseintopurecomicdrama.Someofhiswitticisms
areindeedmemorable,soaresomeofhispuns.Infact,wheneverhefollowedMoliere,asin
histwoadaptations,andimposedarestraintonhimself,heacquiredadelicacyoftouch;he
62 AMAR MUKERJEE
couldthenrefrain fromvituperation.Someofhisprosedialogue revealssubtlenuancesof
speechand adelicacyofphrasingthatcomparefavourablywithTagore,but farexceeding
theneedsoffarceofwhichhewas ourgreatestmaster.
Amritlalwas popular withhisaudiences,and therefore the kind ofdrama he wroteat
tractedthetalentsevenofaplaywrightlikeD.L.Roy.Itisnosurprise that Roy's firstplay,
KalkiAvatar (1885), was a farce, satirizing not the modem but the conservative Hindu;
Ray'snationalism,though.wasneveraltogetherfreefromtheinfluenceofHindurevival
ism, A product of Western education with a personal knowledge of the English stage,
DwijendraLalRoyquicklysawthepossibilitiesofintroducing poetryintheromanticdrama
and ofbreathing intoit thepatriotismthat had gatheredforcein Bengalisociety.Hisfirst
contactwith the professionalstage was in 1901, when the admiration for Shakespeare in
Bengal was akin to idolatry.The consequences of hisentry into theatre were not onlya
markeddifferenceinthewholeapproachtodrama,butachangeinitstechnique.ToDwijendra
Lal, as he confessed in his Kalidas 0 Bhavabhuti, realism now became as important as
idealism, and his hero was no more a person driven only by external forces; his outer
conflictnow hadan innercounterpart.TothispatternDwijendraLalmoreorlessadhered,
whetherinhishistoricalplaysordomesticdramas,thoughhisfavouritethemewasroman
ticidealismdestroyedbywickedness or tyrannyor betrayal offaith.
Itwasinaseriesofhistoricalplays,from Rana Pratap toChnndragupta,thathecould
expresshisidealism effectively,developingintheprocess atragicview oflifegrowingout
ofthegloryofallhumanstrugglecarriedonunmindfulofconsequences.Lifetohimwasa
meetingofopposites,andthetragedyofmostofhisheroeswascausedbyopposing forces
workingagainstthem.Durgadasisbaffledinhiseffortstoliftup hispeople,NurJahanis
tom asunderbetweenherambitionandherpride, ShahJahanwailsofhisdaysofvanished
glory.Whatever be the theme, it was alwayscharged with ahigh idealism merging with
intensehumanism.DwijendraLal tooklibertieswith history as required but wheneverhe
did so,heinfusedthroughhistreatment passion,elevated thought,andaloveofhumanity
thattranscendsthelimitationsofreligionandrace.
Here was, in fact, the basis of Dwijendra Lal's tremendous contemporary popularity,
which wasenhancedby thebeautifullanguage ofhisplaysand the songstheycontained.
But,lookingclosely.DwijendraLa!also had someotherqualitiesofa greatdramatist.For
instance.his manipulation of plot and subplot, hishandling of suspense.his appropriate
useoftragicrelief,and,aboveall.hisknackforfindingasuitableendingforhisplaysgave
himapowerverydifferentfromGirish's.EveninhissocialplayslikeParapare,Dwijendra
La! presents a picture ofthe interplay ofthe most elemental human passions with such
vigourthatnobodyobservessomeofitsblemishes.Melodramatictosomeextent,Paropare
isoneofthe bestspecimens of domestic drama written in Bengali-domestic dramathat
vergesontheproblem play.though the 'problem' isgivenaratherphilosophicalsolution.
Whatissignificant inthe play is itseffort atexpressing thosealmost inexpressible ideas,
emotionsandinstinctswhichbelongtotheinnerworld ofthought.not the outer worldof
BENGALI DRAMA AND THEATRE 63
action.
Thisdevelopmentbetoken, thegradualprocessbywhichBengalidrama modernized.in
spite of the demands of a theatre which yet believed in patriotic fervour. inflated heroic
diction.aprofusion ofpathos.and overwhelmingspectaculareffects.Thesewere.infact,
some ofthe qualities of Kshirodprasad's plays.once verypopular with theBengaliaudi
ence. BUIin spite of the daring originality of his treatment of historical themes and his
fertilityofimagination.Kshirodprasadcannotbetaken astheharbingerofthemodemage.
whichmantle moreappropriatelybelongstoDwijendraLalRoy.
Itwas he who founded the dramathatwe call 'modem',though RabindranathTagore
had alreadybroughtto hisplays.then privately staged.someinnovationstoodaringtobe
practisedintheprofessionaltheatre.Withthe publicationof Paraparein 1926.Dwijendra
Larsdramaticmethodhadcome10 befullyaccepted,asisevidentfromtheplaysoflogesh
Choudhury,NishikantoBasuRoyandManmathaRoy,whichwereinfluencedbyDwijendra
Larswork.Eachofthese dramatistswroteplaysofideas-ideassometimesveiledinthe
main action. sometimes didactically set forth-and soughttomakesocialforcesthepro
tagonists of theirplays. Evenpuranicthemes carriedsymbolicmeanings.asinKaragar,
derivedfromanewknowledgeofhuman consciousness,andinformedbyanewsenseof
social values according to which the individual wasjudged. The urban middleclass in
creasingly became the subjectofthe drama.and individualism wasnowexploredandas
sertedindealingwithvarioussocialproblems.Asthistheatreofideasemerged,therewas
also evidence ofthe better teamwork thatcharacterizespresent-day production',
Infact.the foundations ofa new.realisticstylein thetheatrehadalreadybeenlaidby
SisirKumarBhaduri.Withhim thestagebecamelifelikeandriditselfofitspictorialtrap
pings.Falseglamourwas eliminatedforfearofdisturbingtheillusionofreality.andahigh
intellectualstandardwasappliedtoallinterpretativeacting,ApartfromSisirKumar'sown
dominant presence. the theatre was now a cooperative effon: the designs of Charu and
JarniniRoyandthelighting work ofSatuSencontributed10 it,togetherwithexperiments
with the revolving stage. the wagon stage. the shunting stage. sets and draperywork,In
fact.mostofthenewgenerationofdramatistslikeSachinSengupta.BidhayakBhattacharya.
andMahendraGuptarespondedtothe new modeloftheatrebyconstructingtheirplaysto
suititsrequirements.Actiononthestagewasspeededupbyreadjustingtheearlierscenic
division.by making the speeches sbort, and bydeleting allsoliloquiesand asides.Four
dimensional settings came to be utilized. and dramatists now frequently wrote plays in
tendedforaparticular companyof playersorsetofactors.
Of the dramatists writing today. the most outstanding are. almost in order of merit,
SachinSengupta, Manmatha Roy.Bidhayak Bhattacharya.MahendraGupta,andlaladhar
Chatterji.They have sought to widen the horizons ofdrama by the number of plays they
have written,the resourcefulness they havedisplayedinhandlingnewthemes.theefforts
they have made in creating new dramatic situations. and the sense ofrebellion that they
have instilled in the theatre.More and more.they havesubstituted innerconflictforouter
AMARMUKERJEE
conflict as the stage became the arena fora variety of ideas and impulses. frequently
importedfromtheWest.Whethertheseweretheoriesofpsychologyoreconomics,oflove
orsex,oftheconsciousortheunconscious.theyweregraftedintoplaystorevealwhatthe
dramatiststhought werethemostintricateaspects ofthehuman spirit.Thehistory playsof
this period have sought a better understanding of contemporary times; the puranic plays
haveadumbratedmodern ideas symbolically;the social playshave beenfrankly problem
atic andidealistic. Whateverbe the measure of success achieved by these explorations,
dramatistsofourtimeshavebeenaware ofthecomplexityof modem life.They arealso
awareofcharacterizationencounteredincontemporary novels.andonoccasionsnotable
novelistshavealsomade foraysintothetheatre.
Thesearchforanewdrama hadoneadvantage.Evenif,fora while,thestagedelighted
inthe presenceofslick,fashionable. ultra-modem womenwhowerefoundpittedagainst
meninnewplays.atimecamewhen,asinKalaTakaorEiSwadhinata orChhenra Tar,
immediate socialproblemswereaddressedinlightof modemresearches into the human
personality. When this approach was applied incontext of Nabanna orNutan lhudi or
Dukhirlman,theground waspreparedfortheriseofanewdramawhichwouldsteerclear
ofsheernaturalismaswellassentimentalcomedy.ThereturntothefolkfeelingthatTagore
hadanticipated yearsago. andits properemployment in drama. as indicatedin some
Bohurupeeproductions, wouldalonecreateconditionsforthebirth of anewstage.
ThattheBengali stageisnotlaggingbehindisevident from the awards that Bohurupee
producersreceivedinthelastDramaFestival.AfurtherfillipfromtheSangeetNatakAkademi
would be desirable, as well as such seminars which also include displays of theatrical
goods.Alowerrateofentertainmenttax fortheatreshows, andpatronage oftheatrebythe
universities, arealsoadesideratum.Wehave thenonly towaitforthehighpriestofthe
templeofThespis-thedramatist!
DISCUSSION
Mulk. Raj Anand:Itemerges,as I am sure youwill agree, that the pioneering Bengali
theatre aboutwhich we arc talking indicates the approachordirection which the modern
Indiantheatreshouldkeep insight.Iamnot,ofcourse,castingany aspersionsonthegreat
theatres of Maharashtra and of southern India when I say that the Bengali theatre yet
emerges asthemostimportanttheatre today.
Balraj Sahni: I object to a sweeping statement of that kind. You cannot adjudge the
Bengalitheatreasthe bestofalltheatresand SO on.Thatis assuming too much.
Mulk Raj Anand: I was giving expression to my personal view. I do not judge as a
ChairmanwouldwhenIstateapersonalopinion.
BENGALI DRAMA ANDTHEATRE 65
Amar Mukerjee;It isnotforme tosayjf Bengalidramaandtheatrehaveanyclaimto
leadershipofIndiantheatre. Inmypaper Ihave neversuggestedsuchanidea.Ifyoulook
into the history of Bengali drama, you will find that it has always gone through a self.
correctingprocess.Thatself-correcting processhasalways stimulatedthespirit offresh
endeavour[andexperiment]inthefield.[Forexample.]ourplayshavecomedownfromfive
actstofouracts,three acts,twoacts,oneact.andeventoone sceneinsomeproductions.
Icannameseveral suchplays.
Mu/kRajAnand:Who wrote them?
ArnarMukerjee:Ihave namedsome playwrightsinmypaper.
,HulkRajAnand:Arethenamesofalltheplaywrightsgivenorhaveyourleftoutsome?
AmarMukerjee:Ihavegivenonlytheoutstandingnames.CertainlyIhavelefloutmany.
Ialso havemy personalviewsasyousaid youdo.
Mulk RajAnand:Aretheseplaysstagedatplacesotherthancommercialtheatres?Are
theyplayed in the villages too?
Ahindra Chawdhuri: Till 1942,all the successfulplaysperformedbycommercial the
atres usedtobeplayedbyamateurs allovertheregion-that wasthecommon practice.
Office clubs, welfare clubs, clubs organized by lawyers, doctors, teachers,professors
clubsof all kinds anddenominations-used to pcrfonn thoseplays.Dramatic clubs in
townsandvillagescouldnotdowithoutthem.Eventoday,thoseproductsofthecommer
cialtheatrewhichhaveacquiredthefameofclassicsareplayedeverywhere,evenbythose
whoclaimtobeprogressive.Butthelastfewyearshavegivenussomeplaywrightswhodo
notwriteforthecommercialtheatre,orwhofailtogettheirplaysacceptedbythecommer
cialtheatres, andwho have [therefore] formedgrouptheatres.Thesegrouptheatresdonot
possessanystageoftheirown.Theytake theircompaniestosmalltownsandbigvillages
and give performances of theirown plays. However, eventhen, commercial success is
eagerJysoughtbypeople inthetheatre.Ofcourse,thereisanever-increasingdemandfor
plays whicharecalled 'people'splay'.
Ba/rajSahni:Iknow ofsomeyoungwritersinBengaliwhohavewrittengoodplays-
inspiteofsomeexaggerationandotherdefectsintheirwork.
SombhuMitra:Therearescoresofthem:Jmyselfknowmorethan fiftysuchwriters.
Ba/raj Salmi:What happens to their plays?
SombhuMitra:Theyare somehowstaged.Butonecanthinkseriouslyaboutthemonly
whentheyrunforsometime.
MulkRajAnand: DrRaghavanhad.inhispaperonSanskritdrama.referredtoaquality
of Indian thought-s-that it avoided tragedy.becausethephilosophicalviewofHmdureli
ginnavoidedtragedy.ButnowDrMukerjeehasdrawn ourattentiontoanmnovanon-e-a
humanistconceptof life inwhichtragedy is involvedasan important factornotbeyond
humanremedy.ThismarksabreakfromtheIndianschoolofthought.Andyoucannotcall
66 DISCUSSION
theideaIndian.Tagorewroteforsixty-twoyears.andhechangedhisviews.Whilepaying
tribute to the genius of Tagore for bringing about a synthesis between the impulses of
Bengal andthe Indiaofhistime andEurope.Iwould liketosaythat Tagore'ssynthesisis
notanIndian synthesis.
SachinSengupta:HereinthishallwearehearingalotaboutwhatmyfriendDrMulkRaj
Anandchooses tocall1ndianism. He now says thatbecause Dr Raghavan had said inhis
paperthatSanskritdramahadnotragediessintilartotheGreeks.for thesimplereasonthat
Indiansdidnotbelievetragedywasafinalityaccordingtotheirconceptoflife.thehuman
istconceptoflife.asreferredtohyDrAmarMukerjeeinconnectionwithtrendsinBengali
drama.cannotbetakenasIndian!Ifailtofollow thislogic.DoestheHindu conceptoflife
refusetorecognizehumanism?Certainlyitdocsnot Onthecontrary,itdeclaresthatfrom
down below.fromthebladesofgrassontheearth tothestarsinthesky above.thereisthe
manifestationofonelifetobeseen.whichseeksfulfilmentlhroughallknownand unknown
objects.
Indiansavants andsaints. andmenandwomenofarts andletterstoo,didnotalways
keep their thoughts within the bounds of their motherland.Men across her borders were
also to them manifestations of one single source of life whose glories they had always
sung. Thatis thecorrectexpression of the spirit of synthesis. Synthesis is boundto be
extraterritorial.Andthere cannotbeanydistinctive Indian synthesisorun-Indian synthe
sis.lust because Tagore laidaparticularstress onhuman love andinternational amity,it
would not be propertoconclude that Tagore'ssynthesis was un-Indian or anything other
thanIndian. Hisconcept ofinfutitelifewasundoubtedly Indian. Andthe synthesishewas
abletoarrive atwasduetoit.
There is nocontradictionbetweenhis synthesis andthesynthesis expressedinIndian
philosopbyorinIndian artsandletters.Even wbenhesangthegloriesofthe soilofBengal.
thewaterofBengal.theairofBengal.thefruitsofBengal.thepeopleofBengal-bealmost
literallyreproducedwhathasbeensaidintheancientIndianbooks ofknowledgeandwhat
ischantedbyntillionsofpeople whentheyobserveritesand rituals.Allofus presenthere.
Ibelieve.chant those mantras when we offerour homage to our dead parents. Whenwe
remember them. when we offer milk and water and fruits and food in memory ofthose
departed.wealsodeclarethroughthe mantrasthatweare makingthose offeringstoallthe
knownand unknowndeadanddeparted.notofIndiaalonebutofthe entireuniverse.This
synthesis is one bundred per cent Indian. It is something much more than the merely
humanisticviewofuniversalbrotherhood, becauseitraisesmaterialandmoral valuestoa
higherspirituallevel without attaining which nosynthesis can be achieved.
TagorewasnottheonlypersoninBengaltosingthe gloriesofman. Others.from whom
Tagore received his literary and spiritual inspiration. both of Bengal and other parts of
India. had sung and preached. throughout the ages, the glory of man who has stood
unconquered and unconquerable.The great Indian epics. the Buddhist Jatakas. the Baul
songs,theVaishnaviteliterature.arenotonlythe sourcesofBengaliliterature.butalsothe
sourcesof Tagore's stupendousliterary creations andre-creations. To us inthis century.
Tagore'sliterature seemstobetheconcentrated essenceofIndian culture.Inspiteofour
unworthiness. inspite ofourdefectsanddrawbacks, we try 10 knowTagore, we meanto